The conclusion of the recent privacy trial involving Prince Harry and a group of high-profile claimants against a national newspaper publisher brings to an end a lengthy and closely watched piece of litigation. Over the course of around 10 weeks, the court heard evidence that was at times emotional, contested, and procedurally complex, with tensions between counsel and the court evident throughout.

Much of the public attention has understandably focused on the personalities involved and the serious nature of the allegations. However, from a legal costs perspective, the case offers a number of practical lessons. In particular, it highlights how the way a claim is framed, evidenced, and progressed can have a direct impact on both the level of costs incurred and the extent to which those costs are ultimately recoverable.

Why did the court limit the scope of the case?

One of the most notable aspects of the trial was the court’s insistence on maintaining control over the scope of the case. The claimants, including Prince Harry, were not permitted to rely broadly on historic allegations or previously uncovered material. Instead, they were required to prove specific instances of wrongdoing.

This approach placed clear boundaries around the litigation. From a costs perspective, that level of control is significant. Where a case is allowed to expand without limits, it often leads to:

• Wider disclosure exercises
• Multiple strands of argument
• Increased reliance on experts and investigators
• Substantial additional work generated

All of this increases costs, but not all of it will necessarily be recoverable.

What happens when evidence is uncertain?

The trial also exposed the difficulties that arise when evidence is incomplete or contested. In several instances, the court was asked to draw inferences from records or notes, rather than rely on clear, direct proof. This was compounded by issues with witness evidence, including a key witness changing position during the proceedings.

From a legal costs perspective, this creates risk. Work undertaken on the basis of uncertain evidence is far more vulnerable at detailed assessment.

A costs judge will consider whether:

• The work was justified by the available evidence
• The scope of the claim reflected what could realistically be proven
• Time spent pursuing weaker arguments was proportionate

Where the answer to these questions is unclear, reductions are more likely.

Does complexity justify higher legal costs?

There is no doubt that this was a complex case. It involved multiple claimants, historic allegations, and a significant volume of documentation and witness evidence.

However, the case reinforces an important point. Complexity does not justify everything.

Even in high-profile litigation involving individuals such as Prince Harry, the court expects the case to remain proportionate. That means:

• Focusing on issues that can be properly evidenced
• Avoiding unnecessary expansion of arguments
• Keeping the litigation manageable

Without that discipline, costs can escalate quickly without improving the prospects of success.

How does disclosure impact costs?

Disclosure was a significant feature of the case, with large volumes of historic material being reviewed.

This is one of the most common drivers of cost in modern litigation. Document-heavy cases can become expensive very quickly, particularly where the scope is not tightly controlled.

From a costs perspective, the key questions are always:

• Was the level of disclosure necessary?
• Could the exercise have been narrowed?
• Did the work align with the issues in dispute?

These are precisely the issues that arise at detailed assessment.

What are the risks in long-running litigation?

The case also highlights the challenges of long-running disputes. Over time, litigation can evolve significantly, with new issues, evidence, and arguments emerging.

This creates a risk that:

• Costs continue to increase
• Work expands beyond the original scope
• The connection between work and outcome becomes less clear

Where that happens, costs are more likely to be challenged and reduced.

How ARC Costs can assist

At ARC Costs, we regularly assist with complex and high-value litigation where costs exposure is significant and often difficult to control without specialist input.

Our focus is on ensuring that costs remain proportionate and aligned with the realities of the case. This involves working closely with solicitors and litigation teams to understand the evidential position, the scope of the dispute, and how the case is likely to develop.

By doing so, we can help ensure that the work undertaken is structured in a way that supports recovery rather than creating risk at a later stage.

We also assist with the preparation and negotiation of Bills of Costs, ensuring they are presented clearly and reflect the demands of the case without overstating or exposing areas that may be vulnerable to challenge.

Where disputes arise, we support clients through Points of Dispute, negotiation, and detailed assessment, taking a practical and commercially focused approach.

In complex matters such as this, early involvement can make a meaningful difference. By identifying potential issues at the outset and maintaining oversight as the case progresses, it is often possible to avoid the kind of cost escalation that leads to difficulty at assessment.

Ultimately, our role is to help ensure that legal costs are not only properly incurred, but also recoverable.

Follow Us